Blog Posts: Amicus Curiae

Today the U.S Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed decisions of the North Carolina Federal District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in consolidated cases challenging sweeping restrictions on voting rights enacted by the North Carolina legislature. We are heartened by the Appellate Court’s decision today, which, taken with a similar decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which covers Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, constitutes a significant turn against racial discrimination in electoral politics.Read More... (4th Circuit Strikes Down North Carolina's Voter ID Law)Posted by Theodore M. Shaw (Ted) on Fri. July 29, 2016 2:43 PMCategories: Amicus Curiae, Race Discrimination, Voting Rights

On February 16, the UNC Center for Civil Rights and the UNC Youth Justice Clinic filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Hayden v. Butler. The amicus brief supports Plaintiff-Appellee Shaun Hayden, a North Carolina prisoner challenging the constitutionality of the State’s parole system as it applies to juvenile offenders. Hayden, who is represented by North Carolina Prisoner Legal Services, was sentenced to life with the possibility of parole for crimes he committed when he was 15.

By a 4-3 vote North Carolina’s Supreme Court overturned the ruling that the education voucher program, which sends public taxpayer dollars to private schools, is unconstitutional. In North Carolina, taxpayer support will now flow freely to schools that are not required to have trained or certified teachers, any identified or minimum curriculum, any accreditation, criminal background checks for employees, and that can discriminate on the basis of religion. Center submitted an amicus curiae brief arguing the program was unconstitutional because it increases segregation in public schools.

The UNC Center for Civil Rights (the Center) represents the North Carolina NAACP as amicus to the NC Supreme Court on State defendants’ appeal of a 2014 order finding NC’s voucher program unconstitutional. Over 70 school districts, as well as the NC School Boards Association, filed suit in 2013 to challenge the program, while taxpayers and parents filed a separate action. Oral argument at NC’s highest court took place on February 24, 2015, and a decision is pending. Read the 2014 () and 2015 () amicus briefs.

UPDATE: On Friday February 21, Judge Robert Hobgood granted the Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction and stopping the implementation of the voucher program. No voucher payments will be made in 2014-15. The State and the pro-voucher Institute of Justice, which intervened in the case, is expected to appeal the ruling. The Center looks forward to continuing to represent the NC NAACP in defending this landmark victory.

The
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, along with the UNC Center for
Civil Rights and thirty other national civil rights organizations filed an
amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action. The case
involves a challenge to a 2006 statewide referendum in Michigan that sought to amend
the state constitution to prevent the Michigan colleges from any consideration
of race in college admissions, eliminating the narrowly tailored race conscious
admissions upheld by the Supreme Court in Grutter
v. Bollinger and recently reaffirmed in Fisher
v. University of Texas. The Center submitted briefs on behalf of UNC
Law School in Grutter and of UNC-Chapel
Hill in Fisher.

The UNC Center for Civil Rights filed its brief with the North Carolina Supreme Court in opposition to the State’s most recent appeal in the ongoing Leandro education litigation. The case, which began almost 20 years ago, affirmed the State’s constitutional obligation to provide a sound basic education to North Carolina children. In 2005, the Center intervened in the ongoing case on behalf of parents and children in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg school system and the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Branch of the NAACP, with the support of the North Carolina State Conference and the national NAACP.

In a recent "Race and the Law" series, Center staff and UNC Law School professors reenacted excerpts from the oral arguments in the Fisher v. University of Texas. The case was heard at the US Supreme Court on October 10, 2012. UNC School of Law Dean Jack Boger. CCR Attorneys Mark Dorosin and Elizabeth Haddix, and the UNC Office of University Counsel filed an an amicus brief on behalf of the University of North Carolina in this case.

Center Deputy Director Charles Daye played the role of Chief Justice Roberts. Center attorneys Mark Dorosin and Elizabeth Haddix and UNC Law professors Eric Muller, Erika Wilson, Al Brophy, and Catherine Kim played other Justices. Community Inclusion Fellow Bethan Eynon read the position of Petitioner Fisher, Education Fellow Taiyyaba Qureshi took the part of Respondent University of Texas, and Equal Justice Works Fellow Peter Gilbert acted as US Solicitor General.

CCR attorneys Mark Dorosin and
Elizabeth Haddix, and UNC School of Law Dean Jack Boger, together with
the Office of University Counsel filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (“UNC”) in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on October 10, and a ruling is expected next spring.

On Constitution Day, September 17, Center attorneys Dorosin and Haddix, Center Deputy Director Charles Daye, and Dean Boger joined Steve Farmer, UNC Vice Provost for Admissions, on a panel at UNC Law School to discuss Fisher v. Texas and the continuing need for race-conscious and diversity-promoting higher education admission policies. Steve Farmer also wrote an op-ed that was published in The Hill on October 8, entitled Fisher v. Texas: It's wrong to curb diversity.

CCR staff attorneys Mark Dorosin and
Elizabeth Haddix, and UNC School of Law Dean Jack Boger, together with
the Office of University Counsel filed an amicus brief on behalf of the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (“UNC”) in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin.

The case, now pending
before the U.S. Supreme Court, challenges the limited consideration of race in
college admissions and seeks to overturn the Court’s well-established
precedents, most recently re-affirmed in 2003 in Grutter v. Bollinger, that diversity in higher education is a
compelling governmental interest. UNC's amicus brief emphasizes that UNC’s
mission is to serve as a center for research, scholarship, and creativity, and
to develop the next generation of leaders for our increasingly diverse
state.

If you are seeing this, you are either using a non-graphical browser or Netscape 4.x (4.7, 4.8, etc.) and this page appears very plain. If you are using a 4.x version of Netscape, this site is fully functional but lacks styles and optimizations available in other browsers. For full functionality, please upgrade your browser to the latest version of Internet Explorer or Firefox.